Have they ramped up the accuracy of MG from ground units?

[Dagger71]

I'm back after an almost 2 year hiatus.

 

Been spending dozens of hours the past week re-learning the A10c.

 

Currently using fast missions to get better before moving on to online and campaigns.

 

Problem is all ground units are unbelievably accurate with their mgs at shooting me down.

 

Today's mission was my rage quit session and I'll explain what happened.

 

 

Setup mission, some T72s Arty, bmp3, transports and a couple of shilkas.

 

Took out the first 3 T72 out with mavs.

 

Was setting up a rocket attack run on the formation of 2S19.

 

Coming to range i started unloading rockets and here i was getting hit by the BMP3 from 1.6 + nm away!!!!

 

My rocket fire was not succesful in taking them out the 2S19s so i switched to guns, by that time the arty MG finished me off.

 

 

I never had this problem before but now even BTR units take out my plane flying at 170knots while spraying them down with GAU fire.

 

 

The enemy MG seems to be exceptionally accurate and like I mentioned this was never a problem before (unless i was under 1nm from target), but now they engage easily at any distance rendering rocket attacks and GAU useless.

 

This is using easy difficulty setting. I can't imagine how good they must be on hard.

[Yurgon]

In the A-10C, my experience from early on was that if I go low, I get shot at, and I get hit a lot, so whenever possible I stay high.

 

I don't recall particular changes in ground AI accuracy, but since I'm mostly at or above angels 15 it's possible I just never noticed any changes.

 

Edit: In the Huey, I've been down in the dirt a lot during the past couple of months. BMPs and BTRs have a hard time hitting me at max range as long as I don't pose as a sitting duck. Zu-23 encampments are extremely dangerous, but those IFVs aren't too much of a threat as long as my AI gunners are working okay.

 

Maybe you just fly too predictably and you used to fly differently back in the day?

Edited March 8, 2015 by Yurgon

[chardly38]

Yes they have. But you can kill a bmp from 2 nm away. You can make a trigger zone to set the AI to weapons hold until you get better. I attack from 8000.

[Dagger71]

In the A-10C, my experience from early on was that if I go low, I get shot at, and I get hit a lot, so whenever possible I stay high.

 

I don't recall particular changes in ground AI accuracy, but since I'm mostly at or above angels 15 it's possible I just never noticed any changes.

 

Edit: In the Huey, I've been down in the dirt a lot during the past couple of months. BMPs and BTRs have a hard time hitting me at max range as long as I don't pose as a sitting duck. Zu-23 encampments are extremely dangerous, but those IFVs aren't too much of a threat as long as my AI gunners are working okay.

 

Maybe you just fly too predictably and you used to fly differently back in the day?

 

 

 

I usually stay 8000 up until most threats are gone. But even just now, I lost the plane coming in for a rocket/gun run on 2S19 Msta formation. took out 3, explosions,smoke shrapnel all all over the place and the last one still manages to almost destroy me.

 

You show me an MG opertaor who can take rocket fire, gau fire, with 3 of his buddies all exploding around him, and he returns MG fire taking down the A10, I'll show you a CMOH recipient (or other nation's equivalent).

 

I guess I just won't be using my guns anymore on the Arty vehicles (which I guess now double as AA) or an armored car/personel carriers (which also double as AA).

 

 

BMP3 I can understand a little, and if i'm flying 200feet AGL, but , if you put it in perspective I don't think any A10c has ever been destroyed by MG from 3000-6000 feet in its history of combat.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Dagger71

[Arcto10]

The MG's have very short range. Why are you so close?

 

The only times I've been hit by an MG is when I attack something else and do not see them.

 

Watch the replay from external view, those MG's and BMP's do an awful lot of missing before they actually hit you. The problem is you are in the kill zone too long I would guess!

[Deezle]

This is the most frustrating thing about DCS A-10 for me. I have no problem taking out Shilkas with the GAU but get in close enough (under .7nm) to kill an MBT with guns and I just get shredded more often than not. There's no way a manually fired MG is that accurate, certainly not when it's being rained down upon with 30mm fury. Frustrating.

[Yurgon]

I usually stay 8000 up until most threats are gone. But even just now, I lost the plane coming in for a rocket/gun run on 2S19 Msta formation. took out 3, explosions,smoke shrapnel all all over the place and the last one still manages to almost destroy me.

 

You show me an MG opertaor who can take rocket fire, gau fire, with 3 of his buddies all exploding around him, and he returns MG fire taking down the A10, I'll show you a CMOH recipient (or other nation's equivalent).

 

I just tried this scenario; I set up a group of 4 2S19 actively shelling a target area and a convoy of 4 BTR-80 on a road (with a couple klicks spacing between the groups).

 

The Mstas beat me up pretty badly when I went straight in; my right engine suffered from partial power loss and some avionics were damaged. The BTRs finished off what was left of me of during my first attack on them.

 

Lesson learned: I went in straight and came waaay too close to the targets. So I flew the same mission again and tried to make sure I wouldn't get shot by them. I still took a hit to the TGP on my third run on the Mstas, but that was it. All 8 vehicles destroyed with 21 rockets, one Maverick and some 800 rounds of the GAU-8 (note, I never said I was particularly good at rocket and gun runs).

 

Now, after the first attempt on the mission one might be tempted to say that the AI accuracy is frustratingly good and unrealistic. Maybe so. Then again, what are they gonna do anyway? Duck and cover? Behind what?

 

Personally, what I take away from the terrible outcome of my first attempt is that I screwed up big time, coming too close to the enemy and offering them all the shots they needed to get a mission kill on a vastly superior enemy (superior in the sense that I denied them anti air cover and my weapons far out-range theirs). So, if I get shot down, if I even get damaged against this kind of enemy, it's not DCS's fault - it's my own, and all the complaining in the world won't help me get any better with the A-10C. But if I learn from my mistakes and adapt, I get 8/8 targets with minimal damage to my jet (still not perfect, but a lot better).

 

In essence, is the AI too accurate? Maybe. Is it your fault if they hit you? Almost definitely.

[chardly38]

I have to agree with Dagger71 that bmp's have become alot move accurate. In the past I would get damaged 10% now its more like 90%. I have tryed my best to have more of a standoff range. This subject has come up before. Dagger to help try setting ROE functions. Lets say one of the bmps is damaged have them all hold weapons. Or do like Yurgon suggest and attack from 2nm out.

[Mike5560]

BMP 2s and 3s are a big nuisance while flying low altitude. They will engage before a shilka will, outside 2 nm. BMP 1s have a 105 cannon only, don't know if they fire back with it but I've never been hit by one, though it's difficult to differentiate them between BMP 2s anyway.

 

If you're able to strafe from 5,000 AGL or higher, any strafe 15 deg. or more of dive and they will fire at a lot shorter distance. I have the pipper/PAC1 on them by 1.4nm and fire a one second burst at 1.2 with a brisk escape turn and very rarely do I get hit unless there's a closer threat. Shilkas and ZU-23s will fire at about 1.5.

 

It's all about doing a good scan and developing a plan of attack, having good eyes looking out between wingmen in MP. All this is good info and pretty much "gaming" the tactics until a MANPADS or strela throws some missiles at you.

 

Using Tacview will help immensely.

[PFunk1606688187]

If APCs and IFVs using optical aiming are really this excellent at engaging low flying attack aircraft why would you bother with radar guided AAA units? Its obvious that units are far too accurate. Ground unit behavior is obviously under modeled. If a T-72 gets blown up, do you really think that the commanders in every other tank in that platoon are going to turn out to man the MG? Hell no.

 

Some realism can be made up in using the suppression script that will actually allow you to suppress units by engaging them. Other solutions are found in flying smart. Use terrain masking before popping up to fire on a target, fly evasive patterns in when you have no masking, and use high G escape maneuvers with jinks on the way out.

 

Even so trained AAA batteries in this game are far less accurate when using optically guided dedicated AAA platforms whereas IFVs seem to have godly aim using non-dedicated platforms which is simply not plausible. Its a clear limitation of the modeling of ground units. Nevertheless people who insist you must stay at Angel 15 or Angels 8 to avoid getting hit are forgetting that the A-10 was designed to fly in this environment. Manpads and complex IADs are a real bummer for the A-10, but pintle mounted machine guns were accounted for in its design so fly low, fly fast, fly smart and you can do just fine.

 

Real pilots practice evasive maneuvers against ground fire the same way they practice defeating missiles. If your only solution to a threat to your aircraft is to fly outside of the engagement envelope then a realistic mission will see you basically flat footed between 100AGL and Angels 30.

 

Again, suppression script. It makes 2 ship tactics actually useful. There are probably a few others out there too that help with making AI responses more realistic.

[ttaylor0024]

I had the same thoughts today. Opened fire and broke off the attack at 1.2nm, got absolutely destroyed by 2 other BMPs. That aim is unreal.

[skendzie]

Man, the more I play and read threads about DCS, the more I get concerned about it (because I want to like it so bad). This seems to be a serious problem for realism. Between

 

-Super accurate machine gunners taking down A10s and Su-25s

-Completely messed up missile flight mechanics

-Inability to spot anything from 4km out (need some sort of reflection or scaling!)

 

I am getting very worried for the health of the DCS World. I know most of the resources are being used on DCS2 so hopefully some of these issues can be addressed after it is released. I want to love you DCS!

[PFunk1606688187]

Scripting helps, new graphics engine will reflect an (as yet to be determined in scope) improvement in visuals, and no comment on missiles. :D

[Snoopy]

Jink Jink Jink...if you know how to properly do the maneuver even the killer accurate ground fire from vehicles that shouldn't be that accurate can be avoided.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Why would you attack with guns at 170 kts?

[PFunk1606688187]

Why would you attack with guns at 170 kts?

 

Wow, I missed that. Yea, wtf. You should be north of 300KTS on your attacks because god knows you're not going to gain any speed climbing out as an A-10 pulling 4Gs.

 

I am going to go out on a limb and assume its your typical nugget idea that the slower you go the easier it is to shoot. Congrats, you got 3/4 of your rounds on target, and lost the Air Force a jet worth millions in spare parts. *cough* *joke* *cough*

[WildBillKelsoe]

my guess is he's trying to save fuel.. don't worry buddy, just set that PPH on 600-1000 per engine, and you should have no problems.

[Greekbull]

It is a valid point though. Non AAA units are way too accurate and completely unrealistic in DCS. Hopefully they gets fixed going forward into DCS 2.0.

[july865]

Non AAA units are way too accurate and completely unrealistic in DCS.

why do you feel that is?

[arkroyale048]

^

 

A guy on top of a tank with a machine gun (unguided) can reliably shoot down an A-10 in a strafing run.

 

I've noticed this for quite sometime and to me it's a little vexing. However it can be worked around by diving steeper or I'd rather just engage at the maximum range of the guns.

[Greekbull]

why do you feel that is?

 

It's certainly something that can be overcome with higher altitudes and tactics but it is still very unrealistic. Honestly once the AAA and SAMs have been dealt with you should be able to attack without much worry or accurate fire coming from BMPs and T-72s...

[SkateZilla]

Ground Units Strafing fire.is only as accurate as you let them be.

 

Fly in a straight line and you'll be lit up everytime, every soldier knows how to lead a target.

 

When I engage a unit, I pull off and start zig zagging immediately after the weapon is deployed or after a burst or 2 from the GAU,

[Greekbull]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I know how to employ the weapons and survive. Just saying the non AA fire is too accurate. The chance of a bmp or tank crew member hitting a moving A-10 should be incredibly difficult even with their knowledge of leading a moving target(which anyone whose hunted knows in addition to the military). No big deal either way. I'm not unfairly criticising DCS. Its just an area they could improve upon. Still the best and most accurate simulator out there IMO.

[rcjonessnp175]

This is a big issue and needs a fix. bmp3 are more deadly than a shilka theirs something wrong. But it is all about technique. Another ridiculous aspect is the armor strength on the front of the bmp3. Sorry but a 30mm no matter what platform that round is shot from penetrates bmp 3 easily with Api real world.

Hopefully these things are all touched up in dcs 2.0. Currently you need to be mindful of what your engaging and conduct such contracts/Ttp to counter their strengths and take advantage of their weaknesses. Exploit!

[Nerdwing]

Alot of it isnt the gun accuracy itself (dispersion), but the ease in which the vehicle detects and tracks the aircraft. Flying over a BMP-2 unit for instance with 4 vehicles, and they'll all initiate/detect you and begin tracking immediately. A buttoned up BMP isnt going to be able to do that, and even with the crew turned out preemptively its going to be difficult to pull off even momentarily.